MIAMI  Fighting to curry favor with Floridas large pool of Hispanic voters, Newt Gingrich on Wednesday called for a guest-worker program for most illegal immigrants, but his campaign could not say whether those people would be on a path to citizenship - the key question in the immigration debate.

Under close questioning by Univisions political host, Jorge Ramos, Mr. Gingrich said he would grant quick citizenship rights to illegal immigrants...

It seems to me this is a very important issue, has been for years and we keep getting more of the same and an horrible drain on our country as if a spigot cannot be turned off, it was even as an issue risen in the very face of King Obama himself on Arizonan soil yesterday by a courageous woman, Governor down there who is under literal invasion. At any rate, my analysis of this position is that it is, or could be categorized under that of, traditional “compassionate conservatism”. Such as per John McCain, Lindsey Graham, Mitt Romney under his governorship, Bush/Rove, etc.

I’ve mostly just heard him talking about sealing the border by any means necessary, by 2014. Also vigorously enforcing measures like E-Verify, establishing English as the official language of government, etc.

Beyond that, he’s been a realistic and admitted that some people will inevitably be allowed to stayparticularly those who’ve been here for 20-25 yrs or more, but that they’d have to pursue citizenship. This is reasonable.

From everything I gather, Newt’s stance is very close to what Palin endorsed. Many in the PDS brigade slammed that as ‘pro amnesty.

The thing that they then and the pro-Obama crew today faol to grasp (due to an inability or unwillingness to think critically) is that the plan results in practically no actual citizenship given to current illegals.

The key point is that they go to the back of the line.

Now look HONESTLY at that line. It is an ever growing line filled with tens if not hundreds of thousands of people across the globe who are applying for citizenship the right/legal way.

And as new people get in that line every day, they do so AHEAD of the illegals at the back. Over and over.

The end result is that until people stop trying to come to America, the illegals at the back will never make it to the front.

The fact of the matter is that Newt, like Palin before, neutralizes the Dems ‘you hate immigrants’ By in fact providing a very real ‘path to citizenship’ that they scream and demagogue for. It’s just that the path takes longer to walk than the lifespan of the illegal on it.

Legal immigrants don’t have that problem. They come just fine like they always have.

And in the mean time, the rest of the things are put into play. A fence, deportation, laws that leave illegals without work, a place to live, state bennies etc.

Yeah, I’m aware of that possibility. So obviously reasonable measures need to be set up so Dems can’t do that.

But quibbling over any of this is senseless speculation. No viable solutions to illegal immigration can happen until the border is sealed, period. So for now, I’d rather opt for the candidate who I think actually has the nerve to do it.

Afraid I will have to admit to being one of those purists. I do not believe in this particular “fait accompli”. Just because our politicians, on both sides of the fence, allowed 12-20 million illegals into this country does not mean that we need to accept them as citizens. Deny them jobs and benefits and they will go back on their own. Two or three times, this century, the government has sent non-citizen Mexicans back to Mexico, following one of our wars. It can be done. This country, in this condition, cannot absorb this many third-worlders right now. If a US President is going to allow this, it will not be one that I voted for. If this is Newt’s stand, then he will not win because I voted for the SOB. I did not vote for McLame and I will not vote for anyone who does not favor moving the border back to its original place. PERIOD.

“And in the mean time, the rest of the things are put into play. A fence, deportation, laws that leave illegals without work, a place to live, state bennies etc.”

Gingrich is going to do all of these things? Or is he saying he will do all of these things, while at the same time, talking a different tune out of the other side of his mouth to our Latin voters. Sorry for the cynicism, but I have seen ZERO evidence of any politician trying to do any of these things.

Actually I don’t expect Gingrich personally to do them. I do however feel he will not prosecute AZ or any other state, I do not feel he will actively campaign to stop laws protecting Americans and I doubt that he will interfere with any number of conservative efforts to address the problem. All of which is a damn side better than we have now or have had for a long time.

I do however, think that he is the best of the available options. If you have a better solution/candidate currently running with the ability to win, please discuss.

Since our other option is the Road Warrior scenario, which we may end up in regardless, I thing giving Newt a shot before the descent into chaos is a good idea. Romney sure as hell isn’t going to do it...he’s too busy hiding his own illegal laborers on the homestead.

Hi David. I understand. I can't sit by and not even try to get someone in there better than Romney- who loves socialized medicine. Newt, we at least have some chance for reform - we all work together to set the agenda. Romney will write us off completely. Rick S. has no shot. Secure the border then we can work out the internal confusion. or all of this is in vain.

I hope our legal immigration policies get some scrutiny. We do not need any more Muslim Africans or Middle Easterners brought here as “refugees” and then allowed to go directly on state bennies or be supported by mysterious non-profits. These people also get the right to bring in their family members later - including their elderly family members, who of course also qualify for benefits. Obama has expanded this program and actually taken numbers away from other legal immigrants so he can add “diversity” by bringing in these people and others from countries that traditionally had lower quotas. BTW, Bush proposed that this favorable refugee policy, which has been in existence for a long time and only expanded by Obama, be specifically extended to Christians (African and ME Christians, for example, are genuinely persecuted) but this was rejected by the Dems.

Our legal immigration policy should have nothing to do with “diversity.” We need people who have skills we don’t (and this can include the ability to be a laborer, since our native stock seems to have gotten too lazy for this and would rather brew meth) and who really want to get ahead and be part of things, not a bunch of sullen “refugees” who spend the rest of their time here either plotting to kill us or figuring out how they can run welfare scams.

I would propose cutting off all federal funds to any city that declares itself a sanctuary city.

He said that if UPS and FedEx could keep track of millions of packages a day, the federal government should be able to track illegal immigrants in the country. But Gingrich added: I dont believe well ever pass a bill which requires us to hunt down every single person who has been in this country for some time illegally.

Gingrich also said he would favor a very sophisticated, very clean guest worker program. I think we should go back to the World War Two selective service model where local citizens are certified at a local level, where they actually know the person, he said.

If the person is a good citizen, has genuine ties to the United States, has genuine roots, they still dont get amnesty, they still dont get citizenship, they still dont get the right to vote.

=============================================

They might not get "the right" to vote by legislative fiat---but they do it anyway----voting multiple times with several identities.

A common practice among "impoverished" illegals is to buy several faked identitues for several thousand dollars each----the illegal then votes........ and profitably rides the US gravy train under several names.

One latino stole $3.2 million UI benefits using several identities. Jose Madrigal---the Washington state tapist---had some 30 identities.

I wish someone would take a look at Mexico’s policy on immigrants and implement some of it here as a start.

From the Law...
“Mexico has a single, streamlined law that ensures that foreign visitors and immigrants are:

1. In the country legally;
2. Have the means to sustain themselves economically;
3. Not destined to be burdens on society;
4. Of economic and social benefit to society;
5. Of good character and have no criminal records; and
6. Contributors to the general well-being of the nation.”

"No other president has appointed an individual who was colluding with a foreign country try to undermine the safety and security of US citizens."

OBAMA APPOINTS LA RAZA LOBBYIST CELIA MUNOZ TO KEY WH JOB We now have the most racist and divisive President in history. No other president has appointed an individual who was colluding with a foreign country try to undermine the safety and security of US citizens.

"La Raza" is a racist and anti-American organization. It's core goal is to overwhelm the American Southwest with illegal immigrants from Mexico who will eventually cause the region to break away from the US and become Mexican territory. In addition, "La Raza" has a more general leftist, pro-Islamist, anti-Western civilization global bias, as can readily be gleaned from the writings and statements of its leaders past and present. They're very much in tune with Zero's ideology.

======================================

RAZA STUDIES TOSSED OUT OF ARIZONA SCHOOLS Raza Studies does not even try to sugar-coat its anti-America agenda and its bloodthirsty plans to kill us off:

One Raza Studies textbook titled Occupied America, by Rodolfo Acuña, includes a violent and blood- curdling speech given by university professor Jose Angel Gutierrez: We have got to eliminate the gringo, and what I mean by that is if the worst comes to the worst, we have got to kill him, (pg. 323).

This is taken directly from Occupied America (pg. 167): Supporters would execute all white males over age 16, (this is AKA the Plan of San Diego).

America-hating Raza Studies teach violence and undermining US ntl security----and preaches the need for Mexico to "re-take seven states in the Southwest...in order to make the SW a Chicano nation.

Course, if you oppose this, you are "heartless"....../s.

NOTE WELL: Adelita Grijalva is the woman on the Arizona school board pimping La Raza/LULAC/Mecha/MALDEF indoctrination programs in Tuscon schools.

Adelita is all up in arms about Raza Studies getting tossed via the AZ state legislature's action...she is the daughter of Raul Grijalva (D-AZ-7) who was just narrowly re-elected to our US Congress.

Raul Grijalva is one of Mexicos most productive and loyal representatives in our Congress....aiding and abetting building a Third World on US soil.

Fair is when you enforce the laws on the books equally. Fair would be treating illegals from Mexico the same as Mexico treats illegals. Fair would be saving all American jobs for American citizens. Fair would be having conservative candidates to vote for. Of course the world is rarely fair.

28
posted on 01/26/2012 3:52:49 AM PST
by freedomfiter2
(Brutal acts of commission and yawning acts of omission both strengthen the hand of the devil.)

Gingrichs Leadership in 1996 Helped Ensure that Illegal Aliens Could Sink Deeper Roots in the U.S.

The mainstream news media is filled with awe that Newt Gingrich showed some compassion for illegal aliens in Tuesday nights GOP presidential debate. A look at his record while in Congress shows this is nothing new.

In fact, Gingrichs leadership in Congress is one of the reasons we have so many illegal aliens today who have been able to stay in this country for 25 years.

Thats the supreme irony of Gingrichs pro-amnesty remarks in Tuesday nights debate. The man who helped ensure that illegal aliens from the 1980s and 1990s are still here in 2011 asked voters this week to consider the inhumanity of making illegal aliens leave this country after they have sunk such long roots here.

If, while Speaker of the House in the 1990s, Gingrich had shown any leadership in stopping illegal immigration, there would be very few illegal aliens still here from the 1980s and 1990s because they wouldnt have been able to hold payroll jobs.

Nobody pushed him Tuesday night to take a pro-amnesty stand. He volunteered it! By focusing on long-term illegal aliens, he took a big risk that the media spotlight (or at least the internet and talk radio spotlight) would shine on his long-term record with those illegal aliens.

What the spotlight will find is that Gingrich worked with Big Business lobbyists to make sure that employers could continue to hire illegal workers, and thus sink roots that would be used by pro-amnesty politicians to justify legalizing them today.

** end excerpt **

And before the usual excuses that the author or the source is "just biased" come in, check out the entire article. Thanks.

31
posted on 01/26/2012 4:20:52 AM PST
by fightinJAG
(So many seem to have lost their sense of smell . . .)

This issue will make or break a lot of conservative votes for the former Speaker.

For my part, the first step MUST be to secure the borders (all of them).
Second, sanction employers who hire illegals. Heavy fines.
Third, deny them subsistence or other support programs that are reserved for US citizens (health care, welfare, etc.).
Fourth, deny them ‘in-state’ tuition at universities and colleges.
Fifth, enact, deploy and require use of e-Verify.

No “guest worker” plan.
No amnesty. Continuing a criminal activity over a period of many years makes it no less criminal.

33
posted on 01/26/2012 4:25:14 AM PST
by PubliusMM
(RKBA; a matter of fact, not opinion. 01-20-2013: Change we can look forward to.)

I doubt that he will interfere with any number of conservative efforts to address the problem.

Gingrich has a strong history of interfering with many conservative efforts to address problems. See Freddie Mac, climate change, cap and trade, his Education Tour with Al Sharpton, his calling President Reagan, the Reagan administration and Reagan's foreign policy a total failure multiple times (and this while he was a GOP Congressman), his support for the individual healthcare mandate, his support for the ethanol mandate, his proposal that the federal government give every child in America a laptop computer . . .

The list goes on.

He may be all we got (we'll see), but that's no excuse for putting lipstick on his pigs.

34
posted on 01/26/2012 4:28:52 AM PST
by fightinJAG
(So many seem to have lost their sense of smell . . .)

“For example he has talked about granting citizenship to people who have been in the country for 25 years...but hes going to leave the final decision to local authorities.”

First of all, he wasn’t talking about citizenship. He’s talking about residency, that is, whether they are allowed to stay in the country or get the hell out. Now, you’re not going to have a bureaucracy based in DC that can go after all these people. It has to be local.
Here’s what he wrote:

Congress must charge the Department of Justice to establish a citizens review process for those here outside the law. It would establish committees to process these cases in individual communities and determine who will continue on this path to legality, and who will be sent home. Congress must define understandable, clear, objective legal standards that will be applied equally during this process. While this process is ongoing, those here outside the law will be granted Temporary Legal Status for a certain, limited period of time until all have had the opportunity to apply and appear in front of committees.

Applicants must first pass a criminal background check, and then the local committees will assess applications based on family and community ties, and ability to support oneself via employment without the assistance of Social Security, Medicare, Medicaid, and other entitlement programs.

The government will rigorously enforce a requirement that all individuals seeking this path to legality must be able to prove that they can independently pay for private health insurance. If an individual cannot prove this, they will lose the ability to stay in the United States.

Furthermore, proficiency in English within a certain number of years, similar to the requirement for naturalization, will be required for anyone who seeks continued legal status in the United States.

Once an applicant has been granted the right to obtain legal status, he or she will have to pay a penalty of at least $5,000.

Moving forward, those who receive this status will have to prove on a regular basis that they can support themselves without entitlement programs and pay for health insurance or else risk the ability to stay in the United States.

“If, while Speaker of the House in the 1990s, Gingrich had shown any leadership in stopping illegal immigration, there would be very few illegal aliens still here from the 1980s and 1990s because they wouldnt have been able to hold payroll jobs.”

That is “just an opinion.”
Fact: Illegal Immigration Reform and Immigrant Responsibility Act of 1996 was part of the Contract with America

If Newt wins, we will have to get ready to put a full court press on Congress to block any amnesty proposal, just like we did with Jorge Bush. I wish Newt were as good on immigration as Bachmann; unfortunately, he’s not.

The difference is that nobody wants to immigrate to Mexico (or not nearly on the scale of people who want to immigrate to the US!). We actually have all of those requirements in our own law, but because we have a complicated structure of quotas (for refugee or other special status, countries, regions, job categories, etc.) it’s not particularly relevant.

It’d take a few years, but this is Newt essentially turning out the conservative and GOP lights in this country behind him.

If it’s not sufficiently ‘humanitarian’ to make illegals who “go to church and are in our communities” go home, there’s no way it’d be considered humanitarian to make these millions of now legal, permanent residents voting US citizens (their offspring of course already would be).

We are in a terrible fix re: this election and the future of our country.

Disclaimer:
Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual
posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its
management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the
exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.